The following interview was conducted between Sovereign Media and Bridget Shergalis and Sophie Ross – two activists from the Merrimack Four.
The Merrimack Four disrupted operations at an Elbit Systems facility in New Hampshire on November 20th, 2023 – shortly after the Israeli genocide in Gaza began. Ross and Shergalis defeated their felony charges – 37 years each – serving only 60 days in jail each.
Now, the FBI has subpoenaed Ross and Shergalis to appear before a mysterious grand jury proceeding. Though the details of the proceeding are unknown, there are suggestions that the Department of Justice is attempting to build a case against philanthropist James “Fergie” Chambers, who remains imprisoned in Spain as he fights an extradition request issued by the United States for what his supporters call politically motivated charges – aimed at stopping humanitarian aid to Palestine and Lebanon.
In a statement provided to The Grayzone, Ross and Shergalis warned others may also be targeted:
“Our names are Bridget Shergalis and Sophie Ross, and on the morning of October 16th, both of us received subpoenas to testify before a federal grand jury in New Hampshire. This comes two years after the conclusion of a state case against us and two co-defendants for taking action against an Elbit weapons factory in Merrimack, NH. Though we’ve yet to receive any information on the subject of this grand jury, we know it must be targeting at least one person, with the goal to charge and ultimately imprison them.”
Meanwhile, Chambers’ extradition hearing is set for November 13th, where Spain’s Audiencia Nacional will judge whether to extradite or let Chambers free. If they choose to extradite chambers, the final decision remains with Prime Minister Sanchez’s Council of Ministers.
Chambers cannot be extradited while he has a political asylum request, which his supporters are urging the Spanish government to grant.
Your refusal to cooperate with investigators as part of this seeming fishing expedition against Fergie Chambers is courageous. What convinced you to take this stance? Were you inspired by anyone or perhaps a chapter of history?
Testifying was never something that was on the table for either of us. Refusing to hand over information to the state is the basic responsibility of every person engaged in political work. We also know that people who choose to testify rightfully face total isolation from the movement, and have even ended up as targets of future grand juries. Collective defense has proven to be very effective, while cooperating with the state is a self destructive action. There are countless examples of steadfast groups of people who walk away without doing any time or a very trivial amount. Imprisoning grand jury resisters is also only legally justified as a coercive measure. If there’s no possibility that someone will testify, then imprisonment becomes punitive, and has no legal justification.
Our decision to go public was initially inspired by the brave grand jury resister Cyprus Hartford, who in 2024 publicized her refusal at every step of the process, and was eventually dismissed as a witness without serving any jail time. This is an incredible and inspiring win. Of course, we can also point to the multitude of Palestinian and Lebanese prisoners who have withstood extreme torture and decades of imprisonment without giving up information on their organizations. One person in particular who comes to mind is the Lebanese communist Soho Bechara, who spent ten years in Khiam prison resisting interrogation by torture.
There have been past cases where the federal government has tried to subpoena activists, such as the 2010 FBI raids on Freedom Road Socialist Organisation activists for alleged support for Palestinian organisations. In that case, the feds failed, and the activists credit a movement of support for their freedom. What conditions are you facing that are different? Similar?
Our situation is a little bit different to the case you mention, in that we have been subpoenaed exclusively as witnesses. But we are similarly reliant on the movement to protect us in this moment, just as much as our networks are relying on us to protect them by staying silent. Any positive effect of our political fight against this grand jury will be a direct result of the flood of support we have received from the comrades and comradely organizations around us who do work every day against FBI and state repression.
In our 2023 case, all of the co-defendants were offered cooperating deals early on, and we all turned them down under the threat of decades in prison. That case ended in misdemeanor charges and a 60-day sentence, which was a win we can certainly credit to a similar movement of support. Also, since 2010, we have seen a global rise in consciousness in regards to the Palestinian cause. This is due to the صمود of the Palestinian masses, and to the incredible power the operations of the Palestinian resistance have had in putting Palestine back on the world stage.
Why do you think federal prosecutors are moving so suspiciously regarding this development? What would they fear if say they were open about their motives?
I think the way they’re operating is actually fairly par for the course. Despite this not being their official purpose, it’s historically very common for grand juries to be used as intelligence gathering tools. It’s our duty as people of principle to refuse to give testimony on anyone who may be targeted by this grand jury. So regardless of the plans of federal prosecutors, we know how we plan to move.
From your perspective, especially since you have already served time for disrupting the Elbit Systems weapons facility – what does this subpoena mean for the Palestinian movement in the US, or perhaps even globally?
The fact that investigations are still being carried out in regards to an action from three years ago tells us that preventing organized direct action is a high priority for the state. It’s also a reminder that criminal investigations and state surveillance can continue years past the point that you would expect.
Do you think the shifting of the House and Senate from Republican to Democrat changes anything regarding this fishing expedition? What about the orientation of the state to the Palestine solidarity movement in the US?
There is always some degree of inter-party disagreement over tactics and ideological messaging; I don’t think we can say as yet if or how that will affect this grand jury, or any other active cases. The function of a Democratic government is to pacify the broad left wing of the US with domestic reform policies, “minority” politicians, and faintly progressive language. Its foreign policy and fundamentally imperialist foundations don’t change. Ideally, infighting between a Republican executive branch and a Democratic legislative branch would create enough problems on both sides to decrease overall government competency when it comes to political repression.
The federal government is leveraging tools under NSPM-7 [National Security Presidential Memorandum-7, titled “Countering Domestic Terrorism and Organized Political Violence,” a presidential directive issued by the Trump administration] and invoking domestic terrorism classifications to target solidarity work, and as mentioned on the Grayzone, basic humanitarian aid to Palestine. How has this specific escalation in state surveillance and aggressive legal framing shifted how grassroots movements operate day-to-day? What should activists and movements be aware of, and how can they prepare?
It’s extremely important for us all to know how to respond to FBI approaches, grand jury subpoenas, criminal charges, and any other type of state repression. We should expect and prepare for the worst to happen, so that we can’t be caught off guard. Bodies like the NSPM-7 Defendants Union help provide a model for the most responsible reaction, which is to collectivize our defense, publicly refuse cooperation, and draw in as many comrades and comradely organizations as possible to support us. The US uses “terrorist” designations and legislation as a political tool to isolate an ever-expanding list of individuals and groups who have very little in common with each other, and are typically struggles of national liberation. We should put up legal and political fights against these designations, rather than allowing the Overton window of “terrorism” to be shifted on a whim. For example, a crucial fight is being waged right now in the UK against the 2025 Palestine Action proscription, which is engaging huge numbers of people on the ground. We should be mustering a similar fight here in the US against the recent Samidoun, Masar Badil, “antifa” and Palestine Action designations. Allowing these groups and their (former) members to be isolated only paves the way for any organized political struggle to be delegitimized in the public eye. The August designation of Palestine Action is particularly relevant in our case, as the action this grand jury has been convened around was done in association with its now-defunct US branch. We have yet to see how this will affect our right to fair legal treatment in court.
From Sovereign Media via This RSS Feed.